Charm Person, Twice?

[carrdrivesyou]

So what would happen if two opposing people both cast charm person or dominate on the same target, with the target failing both saves.

Would the result just be confusion, or does one overlap the other?

[Bohandas]

Charm adds alliances, it doesn't delete old ones, there is no conflict

https://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/prince-charming

[JackPhoenix]

Charm adds alliances, it doesn't delete old ones, there is no conflict

However, you can't be affected by the same effect twice. Unless the first casting is somehow more potent, only the latest is in effect as long as their durations overlap.

[Bohandas]

However, you can't be affected by the same effect twice. Unless the first casting is somehow more potent, only the latest is in effect as long as their durations overlap.
That must be either new with 5e or else a questionable interpretation. Even as stated above by you I reckon that they are not the same effect even though they are the same spell, the first spells effect is to make the tarbet friendly to the first caster and the second spell's effect is to make them friendly to the second cancer

[Arkhios]

However, you can't be affected by the same effect twice. Unless the first casting is somehow more potent, only the latest is in effect as long as their durations overlap.That must be either new with 5e or else a questionable interpretation. Even as stated above by you I reckon that they are not the same effect even though they are the same spell, the first spells effect is to make the tarbet friendly to the first caster and the second spell's effect is to make them friendly to the second cancer

See below,


Combining Magical Effects
The effects of different spells add together while the durations of those spells overlap. The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don’t combine, however. Instead, the most potent effect—such as the highest bonus—from those castings applies while their durations overlap.

For example, if two clerics cast bless on the same target, that character gains the spell’s benefit only once; he or she doesn’t get to roll two bonus dice.

Two charm persons on one target, cast by two opposing casters, overlap in duration, but the more potent one (in this case, the one with the highest spell save DC) trumps the less potent one for the duration.
It is exactly the same effect because it's caused by the same spell.

(Potential house rule: If both casters are of equal power and cast the same spell on same target, I would let the spell effect apply simultaneously from both casters, if it makes sense. In the case of Charm Person, for example, the target would essentially consider both casters as their allies and friends, and would do no harm towards either. If both casters try to command the target to attack the other, it's basically an opposed charisma check between three participants, with the highest one winning the contest.)

Besides, it's definitely nothing new to D&D, so I have to wonder, which edition have you played before 5th.


Emphasis mine; Even the previous edition before 5th edition that followed a similar rules structure ruled Combining Magical Effects in a very similar way (just with a lot more text, basically).

Combining Magical Effects
Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does not affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a specific effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect. Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate in the same place:

Stacking Effects
Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves. More generally, two bonuses of the same type don’t stack even if they come from different spells (or from effects other than spells; see Bonus Types, above).

Different Bonus Names
The bonuses or penalties from two different spells stack if the modifiers are of different types. A bonus that isn’t named stacks with any bonus.

Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths
In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the best one applies.

Same Effect with Differing Results
The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant
Sometimes, one spell can render a later spell irrelevant. Both spells are still active, but one has rendered the other useless in some fashion.

Multiple Mental Control Effects
Sometimes magical effects that establish mental control render each other irrelevant, such as a spell that removes the subjects ability to act. Mental controls that don’t remove the recipient’s ability to act usually do not interfere with each other. If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys.

Spells with Opposite Effects
Spells with opposite effects apply normally, with all bonuses, penalties, or changes accruing in the order that they apply. Some spells negate or counter each other. This is a special effect that is noted in a spell’s description.

Instantaneous Effects
Two or more spells with instantaneous durations work cumulatively when they affect the same target.

[JackPhoenix]

That must be either new with 5e or else a questionable interpretation. Even as stated above by you I reckon that they are not the same effect even though they are the same spell, the first spells effect is to make the tarbet friendly to the first caster and the second spell's effect is to make them friendly to the second cancer

New as from 1st printing PHB:
"The effects of different spells add together while the durations of those spells overlap. The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don't combine, however. lnstead, the most potent effect-such as the highest bonus-from those castings applies while their durations overlap."

(Latest?) Errata added this sentence after that: "Or the most recent effect applies if the castings are equally potent and their durations overlap.”

There's also DMG saying the same thing after the first DMG errata: "Different game features can affect a target at the same time. But when two or more game features have the same name, only the effects of one of them—the most potent one—apply while the durations of the effects overlap. For example, if a target is ignited by a fire elemental’s Fire Form trait, the ongoing fire damage doesn’t increase if the burning target is subjected to that trait again. Game features include spells, class features, feats, racial traits, monster abilities, and magic items. See the related rule in the “Combining Magical Effects” section of chapter 10 in the Player’s Handbook."

[BurgerBeast]

See below,



Two charm persons on one target, cast by two opposing casters, overlap in duration, but the more potent one (in this case, the one with the highest spell save DC) trumps the less potent one for the duration.
It is exactly the same effect because it's caused by the same spell.

While the description of how to resolve it is correct, the last sentence is not.

Two instances of charm person are not the exact same effect in the same way that two instances of bless are the exact same same effect.

I’m not getting into an assinine debate over a point that’s fairly subtle, but Bohandas is right about this point.

I think that as long as the durations overlap, both effects apply or, if those effects are in conflict, the more potent applies. I’m not sure if there is RAW on how to decide which is more potent, but spell slot used, caster level, and degree of saving throw failure (in that order) all seem like reasonable measures if there is not.

[Arkhios]

While the description of how to resolve it is correct, the last sentence is not.

Two instances of charm person are not the exact same effect in the same way that two instances of bless are the exact same same effect.

I’m not getting into an asinine debate over a point that’s fairly subtle, but Bohandas is right about this point.

I think that as long as the durations overlap, both effects apply or, if those effects are in conflict, the more potent applies. I’m not sure if there is RAW on how to decide which is more potent, but spell slot used, caster level, and degree of saving throw failure (in that order) all seem like reasonable measures if there is not.

But you already did?

If two spells being cast have the same name and effect, how are they not the same spell and effect? Are you seriously trying to make an argument based on semantics that since it's not the same occasion of casting the same spell, it's not the same effect? That is asinine.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

But you already did?

If two spells being cast have the same name and effect, how are they not the same spell and effect? Are you seriously trying to make an argument based on semantics that since it's not the same occasion of casting the same spell, it's not the same effect? That is asinine.


They do not have the same effects though.



Charm Person

"You attempt to charm a Humanoid you can see within range. It must make a Wisdom saving throw, and does so with advantage if you or your companions are fighting it. If it fails the saving throw, it is Charmed by you until the spell ends or until you or your companions do anything harmful to it. The Charmed creature regards you as a friendly acquaintance. When the spell ends, the creature knows it was Charmed by you."

I bolded the specific part of the spell that changes when another caster would cast the same spell. So two different casters could charm person the same target. The target wouldn't be super charmed or whatever but the spell would still take effect due to the difference in casters and both now being a "friendly acquaintance".

[Galithar]

They do not have the same effects though.



Charm Person

"You attempt to charm a Humanoid you can see within range. It must make a Wisdom saving throw, and does so with advantage if you or your companions are fighting it. If it fails the saving throw, it is Charmed by you until the spell ends or until you or your companions do anything harmful to it. The Charmed creature regards you as a friendly acquaintance. When the spell ends, the creature knows it was Charmed by you."

I bolded the specific part of the spell that changes when another caster would cast the same spell. So two different casters could charm person the same target. The target wouldn't be super charmed or whatever but the spell would still take effect due to the difference in casters and both now being a "friendly acquaintance".

The effect of the spell is to charm the target creature. Who it is charmed by is irrelevant.

By your logic two people could use Dominate Person on the same target. Now this one doesn't work how you want things to work. BOTH casters charm the target, under your interpretation of the rules this is allowed. Now how do you resolve who's orders the target follows?

This shows that the "charmed by X" and "charmed by Y" effects must be the same effect coming from different sources.

You can continue to rule how you want at your table, but when answering rules questions label any houserules as such. The RAW answer to the interaction is the more potent, or more recently cast, effect takes place while their durations overlap.

This could be The higher level spell slot used to cast the spell or, the higher DC used by the spell. I would use both, checking in the order listed. But I'm not sure if that part is RAW. I don't have time to try to look up if the rules define "more potent" right now. Either way both abilities can't take effect at the same time.

[diplomancer]

The effect of the spell is to charm the target creature. Who it is charmed by is irrelevant.

By your logic two people could use Dominate Person on the same target. Now this one doesn't work how you want things to work. BOTH casters charm the target, under your interpretation of the rules this is allowed. Now how do you resolve who's orders the target follows?

This shows that the "charmed by X" and "charmed by Y" effects must be the same effect coming from different sources.

You can continue to rule how you want at your table, but when answering rules questions label any houserules as such. The RAW answer to the interaction is the more potent, or more recently cast, effect takes place while their durations overlap.

This could be The higher level spell slot used to cast the spell or, the higher DC used by the spell. I would use both, checking in the order listed. But I'm not sure if that part is RAW. I don't have time to try to look up if the rules define "more potent" right now. Either way both abilities can't take effect at the same time.

I disagree with the bolded part. Both of the effects of the charmed condition specifically regard the interactions between charmer and charmed. If you are charmed by two different charmers, those are two different effects (charmed and frightened conditions are the 2 conditions where who is the source of charm/fear is specially relevant), and there is no overlap or even conflict between them, at least as regards the charmed condition itself and the additional effects of Charm Person ("regards you as a friendly acquaintance). You can regard two different people as friendly acquaintances, they can both have advantage on their charisma checks to influence you (rememebering that this is not mind control), and you cannot attack either of them.

As regards Dominate Person, there is, in fact, a conflict, but this conflict does not arise from the Charmed condition itself, but from the added effects of the spell. For Dominate Person, the more potent one should prevail (but still without allowing attacks on the other charmer).

[ThePolarBear]

I disagree with the bolded part. Both of the effects of the charmed condition specifically regard the interactions between charmer and charmed.

Irrelevant. It is the same spell. It doesn't matter if it creates a "different charmed condition" or not to begin with - an argument i might even agree with.


at least as regards the charmed condition itself

Possibly. Again, i might agree on this.


and the additional effects of Charm Person ("regards you as a friendly acquaintance).

No. You can't have 2 Charm Person running and active at the same time. The "less powerful" one isn't working as long as the "more powerful" one is.


You can regard two different people as friendly acquaintances, they can both have advantage on their charisma checks to influence you (rememebering that this is not mind control), and you cannot attack either of them.

Possibly. Again, i might agree on this.


As regards Dominate Person, there is, in fact, a conflict, but this conflict does not arise from the Charmed condition itself, but from the added effects of the spell.

No. The conflict arises because there are two Dominate Person. That is, in and of itself, sufficient to "trigger" the rule working. There is no need to see what "effects" are there. One of the two spells isn't having an effect at all just because there are two instances of the same spell.

[diplomancer]

Irrelevant. It is the same spell. It doesn't matter if it creates a "different charmed condition" or not to begin with - an argument i might even agree with.



Possibly. Again, i might agree on this.



No. You can't have 2 Charm Person running and active at the same time. The "less powerful" one isn't working as long as the "more powerful" one is.



Possibly. Again, i might agree on this.



No. The conflict arises because there are two Dominate Person. That is, in and of itself, sufficient to "trigger" the rule working. There is no need to see what "effects" are there. One of the two spells isn't having an effect at all just because there are two instances of the same spell.

You are right by RAW, though in my table I would probably rule it differently.

[Protolisk]

Reading this thread, I have a question. This is probably a bit of an edge case.

What if someone is targeted by both Dominate Person and Dominate Monster? They are different spells. Who controls them now? What if they were both cast at using a level 9 spell slot?

[JumboWheat01]

I would say the one who cast Dominate Monster would be in control. It's a stronger effect, it targets all creatures rather than just humanoids, and it has a higher innate spell level to (not that that really means anything most of the time.)

[ThePolarBear]

Reading this thread, I have a question. This is probably a bit of an edge case.

What if someone is targeted by both Dominate Person and Dominate Monster? They are different spells. Who controls them now? What if they were both cast at using a level 9 spell slot?

RAW i think there's really no "right" answer. It is not "the same spell" nor "the same feature". It could be extrapolated that it is "the same effect", expecially when cast at 9th level. I could see an argument saying that the newest is "stronger", that Dominate Monster is "stronger", that both cohexist at the same time possibly making the target unable to do pretty much anything.

It is an interesting question. I would be interested in hearing about this from JC even if in an informal way with a bit of reasoning behind the possible RAW - RAI and RAwhat-JC-would-do.

Also i should make a note to self to check the conditions (like charmed) because what Diplomancer said about charmed is just as interesting. I honestly do not remember how conditions work exactly (and are not explicitly stated as "features"). I mean... you can't really be double prone, but double charmed might make sense.
If you can't be double charmed (for some rule i don't remember about, for example) then it would also possibly solve the Dominate situation.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

"If multiple effects impose the same condition on a creature, each instance of the condition has its own duration, but the condition’s effects don’t get worse. A creature either has a condition or doesn’t"

So, with charm person or whatever other spell, both casters can cast it on a creature each having their own duration of how long the creature is charmed and each are a "friendly acquaintance" to the target.

[Grek]

Reading this thread, I have a question. This is probably a bit of an edge case.

What if someone is targeted by both Dominate Person and Dominate Monster? They are different spells. Who controls them now? What if they were both cast at using a level 9 spell slot?

Assuming the DC/caster level was the same for both castings, the target is charmed by both casters, have a telepathic link with both casters and does its best to obey both casters. If their orders ever conflict, whoever cast the more recent spell has priority.

A good way to think about it is Bestow Curse. You can't 'curse' someone with "is allergic to cat feathers" in order to negate a prior casting of Bestow Curse which gave them disadvantage on Strength checks. The subject would just have both curses, and if there was ever a situation where both apply, the stronger of the two (in terms of save DC/caster level) would take priority.

[ThePolarBear]

So, with charm person or whatever other spell, both casters can cast it on a creature each having their own duration of how long the creature is charmed and each are a "friendly acquaintance" to the target.

But one of the spells effect are not considered when the same spell is cast two times on the same target. This includes causing the condition in the first place. A person under Charm Person entering an antimagic field would no longer be charmed just as much as a person under two Charm Person spells would be charmed only once - as if it was under a single Charm Person.

- edit - Furthermore extrapolating from the quote... if a condition can't get worse it can't also increase the number of people you are charmed by. That very much would be "getting worse" for me.

[BurgerBeast]

But you already did?

If two spells being cast have the same name and effect, how are they not the same spell and effect? Are you seriously trying to make an argument based on semantics that since it's not the same occasion of casting the same spell, it's not the same effect? That is asinine.

You’ve presented a circular argument. If two spells have the same name and effect, then they have the same name and effect. But I am denying that they have the same effect. That’s the point.

It is not a semantic argument. It is a logical argument.

You are tripping over semantics, which makes it hard for you to understand my point.

Consider a spell that gives the target disadvantage to attack the caster. If two different casters cast this spell, does one override the other? I think the answer is obviously not. The target just has disadvantage to hit two different people.

The effect of bless is to give me +1d4 to various rolls. A second casting gives me +1d4 to the same various rolls. That is exactly the same effect.

If Joe casts a spell on me that makes me see Joe as a friend, and then Sally casts the same spell as Joe on me that makes me see Sally as a friend... that is not exactly the same effect. Seeing Joe as a friend is not the same as seeing Sally as a friend.

This is plain as day. You cannot be confused by this unless you are tripping over semantics (same vs same).

Same spell. Not the same effect.

[JackPhoenix]

You’ve presented a circular argument. If two spells have the same name and effect, then they have the same name and effect. But I am denying that they have the same effect. That’s the point.

*Snip*

It doesn't matter if they have the same effect or not. "Same name" is all that matters. If you fail your save against two different castings of Charm Person, only the most potent (or latest, if both are equaly potent) has an effect on you. The effect doesn't have to be the same.... you can't have advantage on two types of ability check from two castings of Enhance Ability either. You certainly can be charmed by multiple different creatures, as long as they are using different means of charming you.

If Joe casts a spell on you that makes you see Joe as a friend, and then Sally casts the same spell as Joe on you that makes you see Sally as a friend, the effect of Joe's spell is overwritten and you don't have to see Joe as a friend, as long as you're under Sally's spell.

[BurgerBeast]

If Joe casts a spell on you that makes you see Joe as a friend, and then Sally casts the same spell as Joe on you that makes you see Sally as a friend, the effect of Joe's spell is overwritten and you don't have to see Joe as a friend, as long as you're under Sally's spell.

Source? If not, this is pure interpretation.

There’s a difference between over-riding and over-writing.

It seems plain as day to me, for example, that one character can be under the effect of two bless spells. The effects don’t stack, but one doesn’t overwrite the other. In other words, if either one is dispelled, her still be under the effect of the other.

Edit: you do appear to be right that only the name matters. I would still say both charms are active but only one effect takes place, RAW. This is just a terrible rule, IMHO, and I will be house ruling it. There must be quite a few examples to illustrate how terrible this is.

[Arkhios]

Source? If not, this is pure interpretation.

There’s a difference between over-riding and over-writing.

It seems plain as day to me, for example, that one character can be under the effect of two bless spells. The effects don’t stack, but one doesn’t overwrite the other. In other words, if either one is dispelled, her still be under the effect of the other.

Having thought about this overnight, I'm inclined to agree, that the target of same spell from multiple different casters can have any number of the same spell active at the same time, while their durations overlap (until they don't, in which case the ones still active matter). BUT, the effect of the same spell applies only once (see the example of Bless: two Bless spells can be active at the same time while their durations overlap, but the effect (a bonus 1d4) applies only once). If the spell's effect is somehow dependent on the whims of the caster, the most potent spell's caster is the one pulling those figurative strings. I admit the rules are unclear about what amounts to potency, as "potency" lacks any clear definition. But things like that are always subject to the DM's interpretation, and whatever the DM rules is final (and varies from table to table). Period.

Edit: Of course, DM's are free (you might even say encouraged) to make house rules in their games, barring global campaigns, such as AL, in which all DM's must follow same rulings made by the organizer (WotC representative).

[ThePolarBear]

You certainly can be charmed by multiple different creatures, as long as they are using different means of charming you.

Can you? If conditions can't get worse, can you be charmed by multiple different creatures at the same time? Or you could be charmed by each singular creature one at the time, and the others have to wait for that particular charm to end for theirs to work? Or do they have to wait for their charm to even stick?


If Joe casts a spell on you that makes you see Joe as a friend, and then Sally casts the same spell as Joe on you that makes you see Sally as a friend, the effect of Joe's spell is overwritten and you don't have to see Joe as a friend, as long as you're under Sally's spell.

Only if we assume that Sally spell is "more powerful". But yes.

[diplomancer]

Can you? If conditions can't get worse, can you be charmed by multiple different creatures at the same time? Or you could be charmed by each singular creature one at the time, and the others have to wait for that particular charm to end for theirs to work? Or do they have to wait for their charm to even stick?



Only if we assume that Sally spell is "more powerful". But yes.

You can definitely be grappled by more than one creature, so it should be possible to be charmed by more than one creature.
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/850796806573146112

It's the specific spell rules that trump the general condition rules that preclude having a target be affected by 2 charm persons simultaneously (though they CAN be affected by a charm person and a dominate person simultaneously, and, in my opinion, the "general command" dominate rules would still preclude attacking the caster of charm person. Only the "using your action to take full control" would override that restriction).

[Arkhios]

I wonder how many times do people have to be reminded that tweets are not official rules or rulings.

[diplomancer]

I wonder how many times do people have to be reminded that tweets are not official rules or rulings.

I know you were being ironic, but the answer to your question is "I don't, but it is annoying have to put that disclaimer every time a tweet is quoted. Though it is not official rules, it still has some evidentiary value as a 'reasonable ruling' ".

[ThePolarBear]

You can definitely be grappled by more than one creature, so it should be possible to be charmed by more than one creature.

And you can be proned more than once, but that doesn't make you any more or any less proned. I get that you are grappled by 1 and 2 at the same time. It isn't really relevant what "grappled" you are ending unless you are ending both. You would otherwise still be "grappled". The effects don't change from the point of view of the one being grappled. It changes what are the "ending conditions", so to speak. The same doesn't hold true for charmed, however.


It's the specific spell rules that trump the general condition rules that preclude having a target be affected by 2 charm persons simultaneously (though they CAN be affected by a charm person and a dominate person simultaneously, and, in my opinion, the "general command" dominate rules would still preclude attacking the caster of charm person. Only the "using your action to take full control" would override that restriction).

But the condition quote from SpawnOfMorbo make clear that conditions can't get worse! Being grappled by one or two people doesn't make me any more or any less immobile. I can have my ears burned and damage in the brain making me deaf for two different reasons, each running its course when the other is "cured" otherwise both cohexisting peacefully. The creatures grabbing the same target do not interfere, unless some other effect comes into play. Only the "release" is changed and all those who are grabbing can now move the target, possibly ending the other grapple. I don't take the penalities twice, however. So... Why should i take the penalities for being charmed twice? The condition is getting worse, and by the quote that shouldn't be possible! It isn't getting worse on the same person, but it is getting worse!

On the Dominate+charm: under a... funny... reading of RAW you can cast Dominate X to a person that is already charmed (not by you), have them succeed the saving throw, and still control all their actions.

[diplomancer]

And you can be proned more than once, but that doesn't make you any more or any less proned. I get that you are grappled by 1 and 2 at the same time. It isn't really relevant what "grappled" you are ending unless you are ending both. You would otherwise still be "grappled". The effects don't change from the point of view of the one being grappled. It changes what are the "ending conditions", so to speak. The same doesn't hold true for charmed, however.



But the condition quote from SpawnOfMorbo make clear that conditions can't get worse! Being grappled by one or two people doesn't make me any more or any less immobile. I can have my ears burned and damage in the brain making me deaf for two different reasons, each running its course when the other is "cured" otherwise both cohexisting peacefully. The creatures grabbing the same target do not interfere, unless some other effect comes into play. Only the "release" is changed and all those who are grabbing can now move the target, possibly ending the other grapple. I don't take the penalities twice, however. So... Why should i take the penalities for being charmed twice? The condition is getting worse, and by the quote that shouldn't be possible! It isn't getting worse on the same person, but it is getting worse!

On the Dominate+charm: under a... funny... reading of RAW you can cast Dominate X to a person that is already charmed (not by you), have them succeed the saving throw, and still control all their actions.

I don't think that it's physically possible to be proned more than once, though, and there definitely isn't any mechanical advantage to it, unlike grappling, where it makes it harder for the grappled creature to escape (which also means that being grappled by multiple creatures is "worse" than being grappled by just one, in the same way that it is worse to be charmed by multiple creatures than by just one).

As an aside, I love your... funny... interpretation of the RAW of dominate person, you are absolutely right that it would mean that and this is too funny. I suppose a lot of spells might have that loophole.

[ThePolarBear]

I don't think that it's physically possible to be proned more than once, though, and there definitely isn't any mechanical advantage to it, unlike grappling, where it makes it harder for the grappled creature to escape (which also means that being grappled by multiple creatures is "worse" than being grappled by just one, in the same way that it is worse to be charmed by multiple creatures than by just one).

Grappled doesn't get any worse. The only effect that isn't related to ending the condition on the condition itself is that your speed is zero (and can't gain boni to speed). It just gets harder to get rid of it and there is no real change if we apply the "condition rule" strictly the "you can move" part of the rule is on the grappler. It is not the same for charmed! The first point is that "you can't attack the charmer". If there are three people in the room there is a significant difference in having two grappling the third and having the two charming the target in possible results in regards to the simple condition itself!

For grappling, no matter the order, everyone can do everything and the creature suffering from the grappling condition can't move regardless and both grapples have to cease to exist before they can move again. Moving a grappled creature relies on the fact that you are grappling them and that the creature is grappled. Not that is grappled -by you, you are the one inflicting the condition that is currently evaluated -, even if the result is usually the case. Meaning: you can still grapple creatures that are immune to the grappled condition. They can't be moved by you, they don't suffer from the condition, and you holding them grants you absolutely no advantage (in general) and only uses up a hand. The rules for you grappling are not the rules for the grappling condition.

For charmed, there is a significant difference in the order and if the target can be charmed twice. If it can't be charmed again, the target can still attack another creature in the room. If it can, the target can't attack anyone but themselves. It is getting worse and not only in "how many times do i need to end the condition", because if both conditions are running at the same time there are two effects cohexisting. If i can only have one condition and it can't get worse, i should be able, if charmed by A before B, to attack B freely until the charm by A ends.

Am i being wrong somewhere in this reasoning?

[Addaran]

If two caster can't charm person the same target, then that opens possibility to use a silly Bestow Curse on yourself to become immune to Bestow Curse, Charm Person yourself to be immune to a vampire's charm, Use Deafness/Blindness to counter the one you received (deafness usualy less bad then blind) and a caster will only ever be affected by one Wish.

I personnaly don't see any problem with having two caster waste ressources to stack different effect of the same spell on a target. Two Hex two protection from good and evil on your tank, two protection from energy, etc.


Grappled doesn't get any worse. The only effect that isn't related to ending the condition on the condition itself is that your speed is zero (and can't gain boni to speed). It just gets harder to get rid of it and there is no real change if we apply the "condition rule" strictly the "you can move" part of the rule is on the grappler. It is not the same for charmed! The first point is that "you can't attack the charmer". If there are three people in the room there is a significant difference in having two grappling the third and having the two charming the target in possible results in regards to the simple condition itself!

For grappling, no matter the order, everyone can do everything and the creature suffering from the grappling condition can't move regardless and both grapples have to cease to exist before they can move again. Moving a grappled creature relies on the fact that you are grappling them and that the creature is grappled. Not that is grappled -by you, you are the one inflicting the condition that is currently evaluated -, even if the result is usually the case. Meaning: you can still grapple creatures that are immune to the grappled condition. They can't be moved by you, they don't suffer from the condition, and you holding them grants you absolutely no advantage (in general) and only uses up a hand. The rules for you grappling are not the rules for the grappling condition.

For charmed, there is a significant difference in the order and if the target can be charmed twice. If it can't be charmed again, the target can still attack another creature in the room. If it can, the target can't attack anyone but themselves. It is getting worse and not only in "how many times do i need to end the condition", because if both conditions are running at the same time there are two effects cohexisting. If i can only have one condition and it can't get worse, i should be able, if charmed by A before B, to attack B freely until the charm by A ends.

Am i being wrong somewhere in this reasoning?

I think it's just a matter of perspective if the condition of grappled is worst or not. You seem to think that having to waste x2 the number of actions to escape it is not worst, but diplomancer and me think it is definitively worst. In the same way that being charmed (condition) by two creature is worst then one.

I think the rules want to say that you can't worsen a condition by using two grapple to make someone restrained, can't make cause someone fire vulnerability twice so they take x3 or x4 damage or charm (condition) the creature twice to make them super charmed ( like dominate).

[Galithar]

Two people grappling one person and two people charming one person work the same.

A grapples target.
Target is grappled by A and gains the grappled condition.
B grapples target.
Target is grappled by B, the most recent grapple is technically the one imparting the grappled condition and the target retains the grappled condition.
Target breaks grapple A.
Target remains grappled by B.
Target breaks grapple B.
Target is free.


A casts charm person on target.
Target is charmed by A.
B casts charm person on target.
Target is charmed twice, the most recent charm is in effect. The target is charmed by A and B, the charm person from A is not in effect while it's duration over laps with B. The Charm Person spell from A is STILL on the target though.
Target breaks Charm from B. Charm Person from A resumes it's effect.
Target breaks Charm from A and is free.

Both cases have the creature under the effect of it's condition and require the creature to end both effects to be free from the condition. This is RAW. I could cite the sources again but it's already been done. This was simply to show you that charm person and grapple are not acting different under RAW.

[Segev]

In this edition of "rulings, not rules," I encourage people to think about what is happening in the fiction layer to help rule on how fuzzy RAW interactions happen.

In the case of two people casting charm person on the same target, the effect of charm person is to apply the Charmed condition on the target and make the target view the person who cast the spell as a friendly acquaintance. There is nothing about being Emma the Enchantress's friendly acquaintance that precludes also being Bill (Shatner) the (Spoken Word) Bard's friendly acquaintance. Tommy Target (it's pronounced "tar ZHAY") likes both of them, and both Emma and Bill have Advantage on Charisma checks. Tommy can't attack either of them. No problem, here.

"But what if they ask for conflicting things?" you might ask. Then they both make Charisma rolls to try to get Tommy to side with them, and whoever rolls better (assuming either rolls high enough to convince him) is more convincing.


Now, what about dominate person? Tommy Target is still Charmed by both Emma the Enchantress and Bill the Bard when they cast dominate person on him instead of charm person. He still finds both of them sufficiently Charismatic that they're getting Advantage on Charisma checks with him, and he can't attack either. He doesn't particularly find them to be friendly acquaintances, but that hardly matters when he's magically compelled to obey them both.

Neither can compell him to attack the other (he's Charmed by both, and is unable to take an attack action against either). Once again, if opposed orders happen and Tommy can only do one of them, they'll resort to Charisma checks. In this case, it's to see whose will is stronger. Tommy isn't going to have to be convinced, so even if Emma rolls a total of 11 and Bill a total of 12, and neither would be high enough to persuade Tommy to give the (very expensive and emotionally significant) gift from his beloved wife to either Emma or Bill, the dominate effect compels him to. The only thing that matters is that Bill got higher than Emma, so his imposed will was stronger and Tommy gives the valuable (and emotionaly important to Tommy and to his wife) gift to Bill instead of Emma.

You could instead argue about strength of spells and them being the same effect, but this seems the more interesting and reasonable application when I think about the fiction layer. At least to me.

Admittedly, I'm likely influenced by my 3e experience, where the way your resolve conflicting orders from magical compulsions is a straight opposed charisma check between the casters.


Note, if Emma asks/orders Tommy to escort her to a bar, and Bill asks/orders Tommy to give him all his money, there's no conflict and Tommy tries to obey both requests/orders (assuming the "requests" on the charm are accompanied by successful Charisma rolls to persuade him to do these favors for friendly acquaintances).

[carrdrivesyou]

I leave for a day, and come back to a dumpster fire lol. I think I got my answer lol

[NaughtyTiger]

Two people grappling one person and two people charming one person work the same.

A grapples target.
Target is grappled by A and gains the grappled condition.
B grapples target.
Target is grappled by B, the most recent grapple is technically the one imparting the grappled condition and the target retains the grappled condition.
Target breaks grapple A.
Target remains grappled by B.
Target breaks grapple B.
Target is free.


A casts charm person on target.
Target is charmed by A.
B casts charm person on target.
Target is charmed twice, the most recent charm is in effect. The target is charmed by A and B, the charm person from A is not in effect while it's duration over laps with B. The Charm Person spell from A is STILL on the target though.
Target breaks Charm from B. Charm Person from A resumes it's effect.
Target breaks Charm from A and is free.

Both cases have the creature under the effect of it's condition and require the creature to end both effects to be free from the condition. This is RAW. I could cite the sources again but it's already been done. This was simply to show you that charm person and grapple are not acting different under RAW.

You are saying that:
A grapples target. A can drag target at will
B grapples target. A cannot drag target (reasonable). but B can drag the target away from A without a strength check because "the most recent grapple is technically the one imparting the grappled condition".

Vampire charms target by Charm ability.
1st level Wizard casts Friends on target, "charm person from [Vampire is not in effect]". target can attack vampire.

[ThePolarBear]

If two caster can't charm person the same target, then that opens possibility to use a silly Bestow Curse on yourself to become immune to Bestow Curse, Charm Person yourself to be immune to a vampire's charm, Use Deafness/Blindness to counter the one you received (deafness usualy less bad then blind) and a caster will only ever be affected by one Wish.

By the rule that's exactly what does happen for Charm Person, Blindness/Deafness, and Bestow Curse.It would happen for Wish were it not istantaneous in duration. It doesn't happen for the rule for spells for Charm Person and a vampire's charm ability simply because the vampire's charm isn't a spell, and i still am not so sure what to make out about the rules for conditions in cases like Charmed and Frightened.


I think it's just a matter of perspective if the condition of grappled is worst or not. You seem to think that having to waste x2 the number of actions to escape it is not worst, but diplomancer and me think it is definitively worst. In the same way that being charmed (condition) by two creature is worst then one.

I agree that the situation is certainly worse in all cases. What i'm saying is simply that i see a substantial difference between Charmed (and Frightened) and every other condition i can think of when multiple instances of the same condition are applied.

Essentially no matter how many times you are put prone you do not have to evaluate by what you are rendered prone if not for the purpose of ending it. The same holds true for grappled, paralized, unconscious and so on. You are not "more prone", "more grappled". You have the exact same limitations with one instance or with 10. For grappled, your speed is still zero.

For Charmed and Frightened however if you are charmed it can be different from being charmed twice and being charmed 10 times because the very set of options change: you can't attack one creature if you are charmed once, two if you are charmed twice and 10 if you are charmed 10 times (obviously assuming that you are charmed by different creatures) on top of having 10 different conditions to end. This is "getting worse" in a way that is particular to those conditions so much that those condition seems to resemble "Exaustion", which even if it is not a condition it behaves very much like one for many aspects.


I think the rules want to say that you can't worsen a condition by using two grapple to make someone restrained, can't make cause someone fire vulnerability twice so they take x3 or x4 damage or charm (condition) the creature twice to make them super charmed ( like dominate).

There is no basis to think a condition would escalate to become another for some reason. But yes, it might very much be so and be a simple answer that i didn't even consider to be on the table. Expecially since re-reading the condition rule quote it does say that both instances of the same condition run both for their duration but not that one is suppressed. It could mean, and that would make some sense (even if i can't think of a situation WHEN), that you can't for example charm the same person twice to get... i dunno, two advantages (what you can't have anyway). Or that if you can end one condition (and one only) you would need to end one charmed condition and not all the charmed conditions that are on a creature, thus having different charmed condition each with only one "charmer", and no one single condition is really getting "worse" even if the general creature "condition" is.


Two people grappling one person and two people charming one person work the same.

It probably is meant to, but the result isn't really the same.


A casts charm person on target.
Target is charmed by A.
B casts charm person on target.
Target is charmed twice, the most recent charm is in effect. The target is charmed by A and B, the charm person from A is not in effect while it's duration over laps with B. The Charm Person spell from A is STILL on the target though.
Target breaks Charm from B. Charm Person from A resumes it's effect.
Target breaks Charm from A and is free.

In this case the target is never under two charmed conditions. Only one Charm Person, at least RAW, can affect one creature at one time. The Charmed condition that is applied should also not count being an effect of the spell.


Both cases have the creature under the effect of it's condition and require the creature to end both effects to be free from the condition.

I agree.


This is RAW.

Not really. One part that isn't RAW is that "the most recent is in effect". I mean, there is no indication that conditions work that way and it doesn't really matter for conditions like prone or grappled. Furthermore if only "the most recent" is in effect, then how is the target charmed by both? One of the two isn't in effect!


This was simply to show you that charm person and grapple are not acting different under RAW.

Grapple is not a spell. Charm Person needs to follow the rules for spells. So... yeah i don't agree at all.

[NaughtyTiger]

It doesn't happen for the rule for spells for Charm Person and a vampire's charm ability simply because the vampire's charm isn't a spell, and i still am not so sure what to make out about the rules for conditions in cases like Charmed and Frightened.


Grapple is not a spell. Charm Person needs to follow the rules for spells. So... yeah i don't agree at all.

As Jack pointed out: the rule should also apply to non-spell abilities:


There's also DMG saying the same thing after the first DMG errata: "Different game features can affect a target at the same time. But when two or more game features have the same name, only the effects of one of them—the most potent one—apply while the durations of the effects overlap. For example, if a target is ignited by a fire elemental’s Fire Form trait, the ongoing fire damage doesn’t increase if the burning target is subjected to that trait again. Game features include spells, class features, feats, racial traits, monster abilities, and magic items. See the related rule in the “Combining Magical Effects” section of chapter 10 in the Player’s Handbook."


I don't believe it is RAW because the charmed condition specifies who you are charmed by: Charmed by A =/= Charmed by B.

[Reynaerde]

They do not have the same effects though.By my reading, the rules as written on game features (including spells) don't trigger based on the sameness of effect, they trigger based on the sameness of feature. Only once two features of the same name are combined do effects become relevant, namely to see if either is more potent.

This also means that if Bestow Curse is cast twice, it doesn't matter if different curses are chosen, since it is the sameness of spell that triggers the need to determine which one wins out, not sameness of effect. If cast by the same caster and at the same level, this will be the most recent one.

Also note in this regard, that conditions are not listed as game features. Being charmed twice, but by two different effects, does not trigger the combining game features rule, as far as I can see.

[BurgerBeast]

By my reading, the rules as written on game features (including spells) don't trigger based on the sameness of effect, they trigger based on the sameness of feature. Only once two features of the same name are combined do effects become relevant, namely to see if either is more potent.

This also means that if Bestow Curse is cast twice, it doesn't matter if different curses are chosen, since it is the sameness of spell that triggers the need to determine which one wins out, not sameness of effect. If cast by the same caster and at the same level, this will be the most recent one.

Also note in this regard, that conditions are not listed as game features. Being charmed twice, but by two different effects, does not trigger the combining game features rule, as far as I can see.

Yep. This is how I read it, too.

As previously mentioned, I think it’s a terrible rule. It doesn’t stand to reason, I’m pretty sure that it’s a difference from at least some previous editions, and it opens up a number of absurd abuses, some of which have already been directly or indirectly mentioned in this thread.

It’s another example of how the 5e design goal of keeping things simple really isn’t all is cracked up to be. This rule is positively horrible by most metrics.

[ThePolarBear]

As Jack pointed out: the rule should also apply to non-spell abilities:

Yes. But the particular example brought forward was that of two spells with the same name.


I don't believe it is RAW because the charmed condition specifies who you are charmed by: Charmed by A =/= Charmed by B.

But the condition is still only "Charmed", not "Charmed by".


It doesn’t stand to reason

How do you describe "standing to reason" with something that doesn't exist, like magic? How it works is simply based on what you are told it works. You might not like it and you are also given the power to change that you and your group doesn't like. I don't think "stand to reason" is applicable there. At least not for those magical, impossible in our world, effects in a way that can really be called "standing to reason" universally.


I’m pretty sure that it’s a difference from at least some previous editions

Different doesn't mean bad, however.


and it opens up a number of absurd abuses

Like a stronger spell overriding a weaker one? Or a weaker spell not being able to override a stronger one? I don't see any absurdity here. There might be cases where the rule might not make sense, i agree. But every rule in the game at some point "breaks". And those that are more prone to breaking are those that are either adding fantastical elements (like magic) since they delve in the "impossible" or those that are very broad and thus cover every possible specific case, even those that really shouldn't be covered and should have an exception that isn't there.


It’s another example of how the 5e design goal of keeping things simple really isn’t all is cracked up to be. This rule is positively horrible by most metrics.

I don't agree and i don't think you put up a strong case for any "metric", much less "most".

[NaughtyTiger]

But the condition is still only "Charmed", not "Charmed by".

the PHB doesn't say "condition" it says "effect".




The effects of different spells add together while the durations of those spells overlap. The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don’t combine, however. Instead, the most potent effect—such as the highest bonus—from those castings applies while their durations overlap.

PHB says effects cause conditions and, in the same sentence, that a condition has effects. but never that a condition is an effect.



If multiple effects impose the same condition on a creature, each instance of the condition has its own Duration, but the condition’s effects don’t get worse. A creature either has a condition or doesn’t.

so the condition is "charmed", the effect is "charmed by"

[ThePolarBear]

the PHB doesn't say "condition" it says "effect".

PHB says effects cause conditions and, in the same sentence, that a condition has effects. but never that a condition is an effect.

so the condition is "charmed", the effect is "charmed by"

Can you clarify and expand? I find this way too cryptic. What are you getting at? What is this the demonstration of?

[NaughtyTiger]

Can you clarify and expand? I find this way too cryptic. What are you getting at? What is this the demonstration of?

I am of the camp that says:

Wizard A casts Charm Person on Bob, Wizard B casts Charm Person on Bob. Bob is charmed by both wizards and cannot attack either of them.
The effect of Wizard A casting is: Bob is Charmed by A.
The effect of Wizard B casting is: Bob is Charmed by B.
Since those are two different effects, they can both apply to Bob simultaneously.

You disagree with that interpretation.
You appear to say Bob is under the condition Charmed and 'the condition is still only "Charmed", not "Charmed by".
I think you point to the overlap rule: "The effects of different spells add together while the durations of those spells overlap. The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don’t combine, however. "

However, the overlap rule discusses effects not conditions. PHB "clarifies" that effects can cause conditions, and that conditions have effects. PHB never says that conditions are effects.
Thus Bob is under 1 condition (Charmed) but 2 different sets of effects (friendly to A and friendly to B).

[Segev]

Can you clarify and expand? I find this way too cryptic. What are you getting at? What is this the demonstration of?

He's referring to the argument that the same effect being cast "again" just overwrites the last one. The Charmed condition is not an effect, he says. "Charmed by X" is the effect. Therefore, a target who is Charmed by Bob can still be Charmed by Alice, because "Charmed by Bob" and "Charmed by Alice" are two different effects.

[BurgerBeast]

How do you describe "standing to reason" with something that doesn't exist, like magic? How it works is simply based on what you are told it works. You might not like it and you are also given the power to change that you and your group doesn't like. I don't think "stand to reason" is applicable there. At least not for those magical, impossible in our world, effects in a way that can really be called "standing to reason" universally.

What? What the hell are you talking about? It stands to reason that you can be charmed by two people simultaneously. This claim has nothing to do with magic or with D&D.

It does not stand to reason that Spell A and Spell B do not cancel each other, even if they have the exact same effect, but Soell A and Spell A cancel each other specifically and only because they have the same name.

That would be as stupid as saying that the reason why oil and water don’t mix is because water is called “water” and oil is called “oil.” As if it has nothing to do with the properties of the substances - just their names.


Different doesn't mean bad, however.

Thanks for the insight. In this case it is both bad and worse, though.


Like a stronger spell overriding a weaker one? Or a weaker spell not being able to override a stronger one? I don't see any absurdity here. There might be cases where the rule might not make sense, i agree. But every rule in the game at some point "breaks". And those that are more prone to breaking are those that are either adding fantastical elements (like magic) since they delve in the "impossible" or those that are very broad and thus cover every possible specific case, even those that really shouldn't be covered and should have an exception that isn't there.

No. Those are not the things I was referring to, because as you said yourself, those are not absurd. Maybe I need to repeat that: when I mentioned that it leads to some absurd results, I was talking only about the absurd results. Not the results that are not absurd. I hope that helps.


I don't agree and i don't think you put up a strong case for any "metric", much less "most".

I’m not surprised that you don’t agree. I don’t think you have the faintest idea what I’m talking about. More or less everything you’ve written here (and elsewhere) is evidence of that.

[ThePolarBear]

I am of the camp that says:
Wizard A casts Charm Person on Bob, Wizard B casts Charm Person on Bob. Bob is charmed by both wizards and cannot attack either of them.
The effect of Wizard A casting is: Bob is Charmed by A.
The effect of Wizard B casting is: Bob is Charmed by B.
Since those are two different effects, they can both apply to Bob simultaneously.

You disagree with that interpretation.

Aren't you skipping over the fact that Charm Person is, in and of itself, a spell?

Charm Person is a spell. Another Charm Person is a spell with the same name. One of the two spells, the less powerful, has its effect completely not working while sharing duration with the most powerful one. This includes: "If it fails the saving throw, the target is charmed by". The two spell effects can't combine while one is running at the same time of the other. One effect "charmed by" is suspended and not working and it doesn't matter if the effect is the same or not. So we do not even reach the point where we have to consider if the conditions are two different conditions or have different effects or not. One effect is simply not there to be considered to begin with. This has nothing to do with conditions in particular. It simply has to do with spells and their own rules.


You appear to say Bob is under the condition Charmed and 'the condition is still only "Charmed", not "Charmed by".

Only in a discussion where rules for spells with the same name (or features with the same name) do not come into play. I thought you were talking about a case where any other rule was not in place causing a conflict that prevents the discussion from even reaching a point where conditions are called into play. Like, for example, Charm Person and the vampire charm. Which is not the same case as two Charm Person since they are not spells or Game Features with the same name. This isn't to say that conditions are not Game Features. Or are Game Features.

Two different examples and discussions there. I have troubles understanding why you skipped from "vampire charm + Charm Person" to "Charm Person + Charm Person". The two cases are different and my two original quotes you used were from those two different aspects. It was not "Vampire charm + Vampire Charm" in particular if that is source of confusion. It was "Vampire Charm against Charm Person" where the only rules in place are those of the condition. Which state that the condition effects can't get worse. So, is being "charmed by" an effect like you say? So, since Charmed is the condition, isn't being "charmed by" and "charmed by" having the effects of the condition getting worse - and thus shouldn't happen?


I think you point to the overlap rule: "The effects of different spells add together while the durations of those spells overlap. The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don’t combine, however."

However, the overlap rule discusses effects not conditions. PHB "clarifies" that effects can cause conditions, and that conditions have effects. PHB never says that conditions are effects.
Thus Bob is under 1 condition (Charmed) but 2 different sets of effects (friendly to A and friendly to B).

By your own admission, "charmed by" is an effect. And it is an effect of the spell before being an effect of the condition (which by the way it might not be? The condition prevents attacking the creature you are charmed by and grants advantage on Charisma Checks to that creature. The condition relies on "who is charmed by" but doesn't define or isn't defined by "charmed by".). THAT effect is neutralized in case of spells with the same name. The Double Charm Person is straight out for that reason. Even if it were to apply the Charmed condition, it would be "charmed by" no one, since that is on the spell.

And this is even letting aside is that if A causes B, B is the effect of A for the universal rule of cause and effect (and this applies to conditions, too.).

A creature can't be under two Charm Persons and be charmed by two different casters if we follow that rule at all even before considering if you can be charmed twice at all!


He's referring to the argument that the same effect being cast "again" just overwrites the last one. The Charmed condition is not an effect, he says. "Charmed by X" is the effect. Therefore, a target who is Charmed by Bob can still be Charmed by Alice, because "Charmed by Bob" and "Charmed by Alice" are two different effects.

Thanks.

[NaughtyTiger]

snip
you win by submission.
i cannot follow your argument.
i think you might have caught me in a mistake, but it takes too long to unravel your flourishes.
i'm out.